Evidence of meeting #141 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cra.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, Université Laval, As an Individual
I have participated in investigations done by Radio-Canada, such as the one involving possible frauds on the Isle of Man in 2015. I have also appeared before various committees in Parliament. My reputation may have preceded me. I really don't know.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
That's fine.
Do you want to make any recommendations to the committee regarding legislative amendments that might fill the gaps you have seen at the CRA?
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, Université Laval, As an Individual
The first thing would be to allow officials to disclose privacy-related information to the Privacy Commissioner under section 241. At present—
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, Université Laval, As an Individual
Can you hear me better now?
Liberal
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, Université Laval, As an Individual
Right.
Section 241 of the Income Tax Act—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
I'm sorry, Professor Lareau and Mr. Housefather. I am going to have to suspend the meeting for a minute to fix the trouble with the mike, because it is causing problems for the interpreters.
Mr. Lareau, just hang on a second.
We're suspended for a couple of seconds.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
We're back. Hopefully, we have the problem corrected.
I'm going to go back to Mr. Housefather for four minutes and 40 seconds, give or take a few seconds. Apparently I'm not very good with my times today.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
That's no problem, Mr. Chair.
Professor Lareau, we were talking about the legislative amendments you would like to propose. You have the floor.
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, Université Laval, As an Individual
Section 241 of the Income Tax Act prohibits officials from disclosing tax information to third parties, except in specific circumstances. One of those circumstances might be disclosing information to the Privacy Commissioner where it is related to privacy.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
I do understand that recommendation. What are the other amendments you are proposing?
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, Université Laval, As an Individual
Second, in connection with certification of tax return platforms such as UFile and H&R Block, the Canada Revenue Agency has to make sure that they are not entitled to disclose personal information provided by a taxpayer.
The analysis I have done of the contract offered by UFile clearly tells me that the platform is authorized to disclose all pixels of a taxpayer's information to Google, Meta, and so on, when the taxpayer buys the online software. If a client wants to refuse to allow their information to be transmitted, they must inform UFile. However, nobody is aware of this licensing contract, and nobody is going to ask that this be removed.
In the United States it is the exact opposite. Third parties such as the online platforms are not entitled to disclose information other than with the express permission of the taxpayer.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
You make a very good point.
Could you explain the difference between the big accounting firms and the companies that sell online software?
Is this a contact to which you agree online or is it a contract negotiated between the parties?
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, Université Laval, As an Individual
When a person pays $30 or $35 for online software sold by UFile, for example, then by that purchase they give access to the transmission of their data to the Canada Revenue Agency. The person is then deemed to have agreed that UFile will transmit their data in the form of pixels to Google, Meta, and so on.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
I understand that. However, if it is part of the basic contract agreed to with UFile, for example, the person does not have the power to change the terms of the contract. It might be necessary to legislate to provide that a company may not require that the taxpayer give access to their information in Canada.
Is that right?
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, Université Laval, As an Individual
That is exactly right.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
What you are saying is that it might be necessary to amend the act to prohibit a company from requiring that a consumer give access to their information.
Is that correct?
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, Université Laval, As an Individual
That is entirely correct.
Conservative
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Right.
Professor Lareau, you have suggested two useful legislative amendments.
Do you also want to recommend amendments to the regulations?
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, Université Laval, As an Individual
I don't have any regulations to recommend. The amendments I'm suggesting mainly concern the tax act.
I can suggest a third amendment, under which the office of the taxpayers' ombudsperson would become an integral element of the Income Tax Act, as is the case in the United States, where the taxpayer advocate service is an integral element of the Internal Revenue Code. This would give legislative powers to that office, which is recognized by legislation and is empowered to conduct investigations, particularly respecting privacy. The taxpayers' ombudsperson currently may not conduct that kind of investigation.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
So we should consider the United States as an example to be followed in this area.
November 26th, 2024 / 4:10 p.m.
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, Université Laval, As an Individual
Absolutely.